Lunenburg planners to solar developer: Keep poles under ground

LUNENBURG -- The Planning Board expressed concern Monday night when representatives from a subcontracting company working with a solar developer expressed a need to put all utility lines above ground.

Representatives from Gehrlicher Solar American Corp., who are working with NuGen Capital on a solar project on Pleasant Street, said when the project was first proposed that burying the utility lines would not be a problem.

But with the current infrastructure, the company now says the best option is to have the wires above ground, with four poles on the 40-acre property.

Board Chairwoman Joanna Bilotta-Simeone said the special permit for the project stipulates that all utility lines must be underground.

Bilotta-Simeone said the solar project has been years in the making, and the board had worked closely with the residents in that neighborhood to protect their rights as much as possible without unreasonably restricting the developer's plans.

She said putting four poles up on the property is not fair to neighbors and she would not support any request for them.

Representatives from the contracting and engineering firm who were on hand Monday said they were never told to stop putting the poles up, and that it is the most cost-effective way for NuGen Capital.

The poles would provide a "trip" mechanism -- if there were problems with the solar panels, they would be shut off so they would not impact the grid.

Advertisement

Board member Toby Bakaysa said he also could not support adding utility poles to the project, and asked that alternatives be looked at that still benefit the project but do not impact the neighbors.

"I want to find a solution to this," he said, while asking that all potential alternatives be brought to a future meeting.

In the meantime, no more work can be done with the utility poles until the issue is resolved.

Celeste McCain-Stober, whose home looks out over the solar field, said at the end of the meeting that she does not feel what was proposed is the only option, but rather is the least expensive option.

"It was agreed upon that everything would be underground," she said. "They could still go underground and then come up at the street and tie into a pole there and tie into the system."

She said it is not the town's responsibility to ensure that the developer makes a profit.

The Planning Board also unanimously voted to support a medical-marijuana bylaw that will go before Town Meeting on May 3.

There are no plans for a medical-marijuana dispensary in Lunenburg, but the bylaw will help protect the town if an applicant comes forward.

The board has been crafting its bylaw off the state's draft bylaw, but adding additional items to better protect the town. Minor changes that were approved Monday night include:

* Facilities that cultivate and process, but do not do sell, marijuana are allowed in office parks and industrial districts by special permit.

* Cultivation and/or agricultural processing will be allowed in all districts if an applicant is eligible under Massachusetts General Law. Any cultivation within a building will require a special permit.

* Cultivation facilities located outside of retail, commercial or office-park and industrial districts shall be surrounded by a buffer strip of 200 feet.

Resident Carl Luck questioned a portion of the bylaw that dictates that the Planning Board must be provided with all decisions or approvals, denials or other substantive actions by the state Department of Public Health regarding the facility and all submittals of information between both sides.

He questioned whether the town was setting itself up to get a copy of every email or other routine correspondence from either party they did not need.

Chantell Fleck, who works with the Montachusett Regional Planning Commission and is helping fill the planning director's position while Marion Benson is on medical leave, said she feels that the way it is written, the town will only get "substantive" information from the developer.

Planning Board member Nathan Lockwood agreed, saying the board put that provision in the bylaw so it could be kept up to speed on what the applicant is doing and what provisions, if any, have been granted to them by the DPH.

Welcome to your discussion forum: Sign in with a Disqus account or your social networking account for your comment to be posted immediately, provided it meets the guidelines. (READ HOW.)
Comments made here are the sole responsibility of the person posting them; these comments do not reflect the opinion of The Sentinel and Enterprise. So keep it civil.